Britain and America

McCain says British withdrawal from Iraq was not a good idea

There's lots of excitement in parts of the UK blogosphere (eg here and here) about John McCain cancelling a meeting with Gordon Brown.  McCain was due to be in Europe this weekend for the Munich security conference.  He was to have a meeting with Gordon Brown en route but, with his Republican rivals still campaigning, McCain decided that he would need to stay on US soil.  Not a great snub to the British Prime Minister but a warning to all spin doctors that it's not wise to pre-brief meetings until you are really sure that they are going to happen.

A much more significant story gets much less attention from the blogs but is undoubtedly more important.  The FT reports Senator McCain's disappointment at the UK's withdrawal from Basra:

"The Arizona senator, who has been a strong supporter of the surge, echoed the misgivings of the US military about the British move, telling reporters he “did not think it was a good idea”... “I understand the British domestic situation and I very much appreciate the service and sacrifice the British military made in Iraq and are making in Afghanistan ... Obviously we’d have liked to see them stay longer but the enormous contribution they made in Iraq and Afghanistan I have to just be grateful for.”"

Up until now newspapers have reported private White House and military disappointment at the British withdrawal but this is the first time that a very senior American politician has spoken publicly.

Gordon Brown's foreign policy under fire

Heritage Foundation's Nile Gardiner has warned National Review readers about the "wobby Gordon Brown", the British Prime Minister's lack of interest in foreign affairs and Britain's inadequate defence budget.  Here are some of the problems highlighted within the article:

Retreat from Basra: "The decision to cut troop numbers may have been politically expedient with the prospect of a general election in the air, but it made no sense in military terms, and was a clear invitation to Iran to step into the vacuum left by the British in Basra and southern Iraq."

Mark Malloch-Brown's appointment: "The appointment of the former chief of staff to Kofi Annan was a huge slap in the face for White House, and sent a clear signal that the new Prime Minister was keen to demonstrate a sharp break with the close-knit Bush-Blair partnership. Just days into his new job, the gaffe-prone Malloch Brown gave an outspoken interview to the Telegraph in which he boasted that Britain and America were no longer “joined at the hip” prompting a swift slap down from Foreign Secretary David Miliband. He has also suggested that Britain might negotiate with the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah. More recently Malloch Brown has been the subject of intense media scrutiny over his taxpayer-funded grace and favor residence in London, a privilege also given only to the prime minister and the chancellor of the Exchequer in the current cabinet."

Outshone by Sarkozy: "He has been outclassed and outmaneuvered by his closest rival in Europe, the enigmatic French President Nicolas Sarkozy, whose recent visit to Washington was a triumph for U.S.-French relations. The French leader delivered a brilliant speech to Congress that drew so many standing ovations that he almost had to blush. While 9 out of 10 Americans probably could not identify the British pPrime minister, a sizeable chunk would know who Sarkozy is."

Inadequate defence spending: "British defense spending must be significantly increased in order to deal with mounting threats to national security. The current spending level of 2.2-percent of GDP is pitifully inadequate, and stands at its lowest level since the 1930s. Realistically, Britain needs to be spending at least 3 to 4 percent of GDP to be able to handle several conflicts at the same time, from Afghanistan, to Africa and the Middle East."

Inadequate commitment to human rights: "Brown must also take a stronger stand on human rights issues, from Darfur to Burma to Zimbabwe, and demonstrate some real British leadership on these matters. The Foreign Office’s decision to send Mark Malloch Brown to the December 8-9 EU-African Union summit in Lisbon, attended by Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe, instead of boycotting it altogether, is an act of political cowardice. Downing Street must send a message that there can be no welcome mat in Europe for leaders of odious tyrannies that brutalize and starve their own people. While the Brussels establishment continues to kowtow to despots in the name of diplomacy, Great Britain should refuse to play along."

What about Darfur?: "In addition to pressing for hard-hitting targeted sanctions aimed at the leadership of the Sudanese regime, London should work with Paris in exploring a possible Anglo-French military intervention to halt the genocide in Darfur, as well as building support for the establishment of a NATO-enforced no-fly zone. The West cannot stand by while thousands more innocents are slaughtered or raped by marauding gangs of barbaric militias backed by the al-Bashir regime. The over-hyped U.N. peacekeeping mission has barely got off the ground, and will only contain African Union troops at the insistence of Khartoum, a surefire recipe for inaction and failure."

Related link: Gordon Brown delivers his first foreign policy speech.

Gordon Brown delivers his first major foreign policy speech...

...but it's not much clearer where he stands.  George Parker of the Financial Times calls it "lacklustre" and suggests that it will only confirm the widespread suspicion that Mr Brown isn't very interested in foreign affairs.  The Daily Mail's Ben Brogan ridicules phrases like a "new network of changemakers".  "Guff," he calls it.

Did we learn anything, however?  Perhaps three things:

(1) The Prime Minister is determined to face down the excesses of anti-Americanism on the British left. Speaking at the Lord Mayor of London's banquet, Mr Brown said:

"It is no secret that I am a life-long admirer of America.  I have no truck with anti-Americanism in Britain or elsewhere in Europe and I believe that our ties with America - founded on values we share - constitute our most important bilateral relationship.  And it is good for Britain, for Europe and for the wider world that today France and Germany and the European Union are building stronger relationships with America."

(2) There is no big break with the Blair era.  Although inch by inch Gordon Brown has been withdrawing from Iraq, James Forsyth at The Spectator believes that the overall continuity with the Blair era is noteworthy (as does Jonathan Levy at Sky).  James is also interested in hints of a willingness to work outside of the UN:

"One phrase in the speech which deserves special attention is, “resolutions matter results matter even more.” Now I might be vastly over-interpreting this line but in foreign-policy speak this kind of reasoning is a standard defence for working outside the framework of the UN when necessary."

(3) British politicians are keeping their foreign policy options open.  Although there is slightly more interventionist rhetoric in Brown's speech than a recent foreign policy speech by Conservative leader David Cameron, neither of Britain's two main political parties are wanting to commit to any strong positions for the time being.  Britain's third party - the Liberal Democrats - is clear that all international military action should be endorsed by the UN, that Europe needs a more united foreign and defence policy, that troops must come out of Iraq quickly, that military action against Iran would be wrong.  Britain's two main parties are eschewing certainties, however, and are waiting and watching.

Full Brown speech here.

Bush hasn't yet won anything bankable from his new friends in Europe

In the last week President Bush has met with the leaders of France and Germany.

Last week President Sarkozy was given the rare honour of addressing a joint session of the United States Congress.  Read his remarks here.

Over the weekend President Bush met with Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor and they discussed Iran and Pakistan.

The new warmth between Washington and Paris and Berlin contrasts hugely with the period when Chirac and Schroeder were in office.  The changes haven't just been on the European side, however.  Since the earlier days of his presidency, George W Bush has appeared more willing to pursue multilateral approaches to international problems.  In his talks with Chancellor Merkel he emphasised the importance of a diplomatic solution to Iran.  Meanwhile European leaders continue to criticise America for its approach to climate change.  Although the relationships are much friendlier Germany and France have yet to order their troops in Afghanistan to fully support NATO operations against the Taliban.  Over time, however, America hopes for concrete results from the resumed dialogue.

Later today, in his Mansion House speech, Gordon Brown will - it is reported - pledge stronger links with the United States.  He will describe America has Britain's number one ally.  Relations between Downing Street and the White House have become cool because of the UK's withdrawal from southern Iraq and because of unhelpful remarks by new Foreign Office Minister, Lord Malloch-Brown.  Malloch-Brown's criticisms of America when he was at the United Nations did not endear him to Republicans.   Last week Britain's Spectator magazine revealed that 'MMB' was under fire for his use of taxpayer-funded accommodation. 

'The special relationship unlikely to have much operational meaning in the medium-term'

The Daily Mail reports that President Bush is "furious" with Britain's Prime Minister following the decision to reduce British troops in Iraq to 2,500 by next spring.  There is particular annoyance that Mr Brown did not discuss his decision with General Petraeus, US Commander in Iraq, when they met last week.  The UK troop reductions may mean that American soldiers will have to be stationed in southern Iraq to secure vital supply routes with Kuwait.  Mr Brown has come under heavy criticism from the UK media for the way in which he has handled his troop reduction announcements.  Many have seen his announcements in the context of his plans to hold a snap General Election - plans that were abandoned at the weekend.  In angry exchanges in the House of Commons, Conservative leader David Cameron described Mr Brown's behaviour as "unacceptable":

"You promised a thousand of our troops would be brought back before Christmas - but isn't it the case that 500 of them had already been announced and 270 of them were already back in the country?  I have to say to the prime minister, this is of a different order of magnitude to what we've had from him over the last decade.  This is not double-counting of government spending, this is not just spinning the good bits of a Budget, this is about dealing with people's lives and the families of our servicemen.  And does he agree that this is just not an acceptable way for a prime minister to behave?"

Last Friday, Irwin Stelzer wrote for the Weekly Standard about the decline of the 'special relationship' during the first 100 days of the Brown administration:

"American foreign policy analysts will now have to work on a new policy in which Britain cannot be relied on to stick with America should the president decide to take military action against Iran, or in almost any other crisis involving the use of force. Indeed, the UK will be unable to do so even if it wants to: it has gutted its military to the point where British soldiers beg departing American troops for body armor and desert boots, must rely on American helicopters with which they often cannot communicate because their equipment is antiquated, and its fleet is so puny that Admiral Nelson is turning over in his grave.  The "special relationship" might survive, as it has before, but it certainly is not likely to have much operational meaning in the medium-term."

UK Tories unlikely to fill growing gap between Bush and Brown

Today's Telegraph reports a growing distance between George W Bush and Gordon Brown.  Relations won't have been helped by yesterday's highly politicised draw-down of troops. 

At the heart of the cooler relationship is a belief in Washington that British troops - soon to exit - have underperformed in Basra.

Confirming speculation that appeared here a few weeks ago, the Telegraph's Toby Harnden reports that the President and Prime Minister have only spoken twice since their Camp David summit in July.

Is this an opportunity for Britain's Conservatives to get closer to the White House?  It's an opportunity they are unlikely to take.  Shadow cabinet minister Owen Paterson MP was in Washington recently for high-level meetings but John Bolton, attending this year's Tory Conference was only granted fringe status.  David Cameron was unwilling to give the former American Ambassador to the UN a platform slot.  The Conservative leader wishes to portray a more moderate face to the electorate and that explained Mayor Bloomberg's keynote speech to the Conference's opening day (see picture and report).  My guess is that the Conservative leadership is content to pursue closer links with Bloomberg and Schwarzenegger but not with the Bush administration.

Many American politicians are also suspicious of David Cameron.  Rudy Giuliani declined to have his photo taken when he recently met David Cameron in London.

The closeness of Team Brown to Democrat politicians was confirmed again last week when it became very evident that much of Gordon Brown's speech to the Labour Conference was inspired by Bob Shrum, long-time consultant to Al Gore, John Kerry and other opponents of the Republican Party.

Tim Montgomerie

PS Apologies for the shortage of posts over the last week.  I've been at the Conservative Party's Annual Conference - read some of my reports here.  Normal service should be resumed from now on.

Brown-Miliband likely to propose new multilateral body to combat climate change

At the Labour Party's annual conference Cabinet ministers are only permitted to make eight minute speeches.  It's difficult, therefore, to learn that much about British foreign policy from Foreign Secretary David Miliband's remarks to Conference - delivered yesterday - but here are a few thoughts...

More emphasis on winning hearts and minds: "For ten years we've been uncompromising in defence of our values, unapologetic that every citizen of every nation deserves the freedom and equal rights of a true democracy.  I believe we were right to do so.  But when I went to Pakistan, I met young, educated, articulate people in their 20s and 30s who told me millions of Muslims around the world think we're seeking not to empower them but to dominate them. So we have to stop and we have to think."

...less emphasis on military strength: "Ten years in government. Time to learn the right lessons and move on to address the new issues. Four times we've sent young men and women to fight for our values. Rightly in my view. And we cannot forget their bravery and their sacrifice.  But while we've won the wars it's been harder to win the peace.  The lesson is that while there are military victories there never is a military "solution". There's only military action that creates the space for economic and political life."  The 'new' Labour Government has not signalled any commitment to deal with the underfunding of Britain's armed forces.  A new tax rebate for armed servicemen fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq will actually come from within the existing defence budget - increasing pressures on frontline capacity.

Greater faith in multilateral institutions (1): "In the 1940s and 50s we built international institutions to promote peace for a divided globe. Today, we need institutions which re-define the global rules for our shared planet.  From Burma to Zimbabwe we need to ensure all countries feel it's better to play by the rules rather than ignore them."

Greater faith in multilateral institutions (2): "And the EU, for all the attacks on it, is one international institution we need today.  The European Arrest Warrant snared the 21st July bomber. European commitments are leading the fight against climate change.  Europe needs to look out, not in, to the problems beyond its borders that define insecurity within our borders. It doesn't need institutional navel-gazing and that is why the Reform Treaty abandons fundamental constitutional reform and offers clear protections for national sovereignty."

That final section on the EU Treaty brought a furious response from The Sun - currently fighting for a campaign for a referendum on the Treaty.

During a Q&A earlier today, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said that it was very regrettable that there wasn't a global institution dedicated to protecting the environment.  I predict that he and Mr Miliband - Environment Secretary before he became Foreign Secretary - will be proposing one very soon...

Tim Montgomerie

'Brown and Bush haven't spoken for five weeks'

When BritainAndAmerica covered the first Brown-Bush summit we were a little more positive than most commentators.  Most commentators noted how Britain's new Prime Minister returned none of the personal warmth that George W Bush had attempted to show to him (eg Nick Robinson).  It appears that most of the other commentators might have been more right than this website.

The well-connected British journalist Fraser Nelson writes a devastating critique of UK operations in Basra today (unfortunately his News of the World column is not online) but most interestingly he writes this:

"Blair used to speak to George W Bush about Iraq every week.  But I'm told Brown hasn't spoken to him since they met five weeks ago."

If true this is very worrying.  Without communication at the highest level misunderstandings can become serious tensions.  Recent criticisms by US generals of UK operations in southern Iraq and by British military leaders about US war planning mean that it is even more important that Downing Street and the White House are in close touch.  Otherwise the bureaucracies below them will start taking key decisions.

The Tory-GOP relationship is already cool.  Neither the current not previous Conservative leader have visited Washington (whilst at their party's helm).  It is now the longest period since WWII that a British Conservative leader hasn't visited Washington DC.

If John Howard loses the forthcoming Australian election President Bush will have lost the last major ally who stood with him at the time of the invasion of Iraq.

Brown and Bush bond at Camp David

A poll last week suggested that by 71% to 15% the British people hoped for more distance in the UK-US relationship but there was little distancing on show at today's Bush-Brown press conference.  The spirit shared by the two leaders was captured in responses to a final question about what might have changed in the special relationship since Tony Blair had left 10 Downing Street.  George W Bush paid tribute to America's "most important bilateral relationship"  and to the optimism and character of Mr Brown.  Gordon Brown's remarks were much less personal but he emphasised that he hoped for a strengthening of the UK-US relationship in the years to come.

"PRESIDENT BUSH: Besides toothpaste? (Laughter.) You want to -- I'll start.    Look, any time you share values the way we share values, it makes it easy to have strategic conversations; it makes it easy to be able to have common ground on which to deal with these problems. You just listed off a lot of problems.    I happen to view them as great opportunities to begin to put conditions in place so that the world looks fundamentally different 50 years from now.

But I would say that the relationship between Great Britain and America is our most important bilateral relationship, for a lot of reasons -- trade. Great Britain has been attacked, we've been attacked, which caused us to lash up our intelligence services like never before. We have common interests throughout the world.

But it's an important relationship primarily because we think the same. We believe in freedom and justice as fundamentals of life. There's no doubt in my mind that freedom is universal; that freedom is a gift to each man, woman and child on the face of the earth, and that with freedom comes peace.    And there's no doubt in my mind those of us who live under free societies have an obligation to work together to promote it. 

Don't expect big policy shifts at first Bush-Brown heads of government meeting

Although George W Bush and Gordon Brown have met before, this weekend sees the new British Prime Minister hold their first full meeting as heads of government.  The two men will spend the weekend at Camp David before a formal press conference on Monday.  Mr Brown then flies on to the United Nations in a deliberate underlining of his commitment to a multilateralist foreign policy.  Journalists will be keen to look for a change in the US-UK relationship that was so close during the Blair years.  Although, as reported, the meeting will likely be more businesslike - because of Mr Brown's style - the new Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary have gone out of his way to make it clear that their "commitment to work with the American government in general, and the Bush administration in particular, is resolute."  Don't expect any 'Colgate moments' or any big policy shifts.